Skip to main content
Select Source:

Saturn Corporation

Saturn Corporation

100 Saturn Parkway
Spring Hill, Tennessee 37174
U.S.A.
Telephone: (931) 486-5000
Toll Free: (800) 553-6000
Web site: http://www.saturn.com

Wholly Owned Subsidiary of General Motors Corporation
Incorporated:
1983
Employees: 9,600
Sales: $3.9 billion (est.)
NAIC: 336110 Automobile and Light Duty Motor Vehicle Manufacturing

U.S. automaker Saturn Corporation grew out of a project that General Motors Corporation (GM) began in 1982. The aim of the project was to explore the potential for building a small car of superior quality and value as efficiently as possible, combining the most advanced technology with the newest approaches to management. Saturn realized its goal by producing a car ranked only behind the Lexus and the Infiniti (imported luxury cars produced by Toyota and Nissan) in the 1992 J. D. Power & Associates customer satisfaction survey. Saturn was regarded as more than simply a successful product, however; the company was seen as nothing less than the embodiment of GM's vision of modern corporate ideals. Saturn was the product of an extraordinary effort within GM to create a company from scratch without any preconceived notions and combining the most advanced techniques and ideas in all areas. From community and employee involvement in decision-making, to environmentally responsible plant design, to dealers trained to avoid the high-pressure sales techniques typical of traditional car salesmen, Saturn sought to embody a 1990s model of corporate enlightenment. Recognized for its innovations in product design and production methodologies, the company received a great deal of positive publicity. At the same time, however, critics noted that its accomplishments were achieved slowly and at great expense.

INDUSTRY CLIMATE: 19501983

Saturn grew out of a particular climate within the car industry. Traditionally, the "Big Three" automakers (General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler) had built large cars, emphasizing features and comfort. The industry began to change in the 1950s when foreign car makers (notably Renault and Volkswagen) offered American consumers smaller cars at lower prices. Imports had claimed a 10.1 percent market share by 1959, but they were pushed back to a 4.8 percent share in 1962 after the introduction of the Corvair (GM), the Valiant (Chrysler), and the Falcon (Ford) in 1960.

By the late 1960s, the Big Three began to be challenged by Japanese car manufacturers. The Vega was GM's answer to the challenge. In 1968 GM announced that it would build the Vega from scratch rather than redesign another GM car. The finished product, introduced in 1970, proved disappointing. Vegas were prone to rust, and their aluminum engines warped. The Chevette, GM's more successful small car introduced in 1975, was nearing the end of its 10-year product cycle when GM began to work on a replacement, code-named the S car. In 1981 GM determined that the S car could be built much less expensively by Isuzu (GM had bought 34.2 percent of Isuzu in 1971). Its next small car (the Chevrolet Spectrum) was built in Japan. This series of events confirmed in some people's minds the suspicion that U.S. automakers couldn't produce small cars competitively. As smaller cars were widely believed to represent the future direction of the industry, the episode called into question the likelihood of the long-term survival of the Big Three. To address this concern, Ford initiated the "Alpha project" and Chrysler began work on "Concept 90."

At GM an internal project to build an affordable, high-quality, small car to compete with the imports was approved in May 1982 by GM Vice-Chairman Howard Kehrl in conjunction with Alex Mair and Robert Eaton, vice-presidents in charge of design and engineering. On June 15 Alex Mair sat down with engineers Joe Joseph and Tom Ankeny to sketch out the plan. By July the project had been dubbed "Saturn," a reference to the Saturn rocket that propelled the American astronauts to the moon during the space race with the Soviet Union.

The project enjoyed strong sponsorship from the highest ranks of the company. In keeping with the emphasis on consensus throughout Saturn, no one in particular is considered the project's founding father. In the words of then-GM Chief Roger Smith, "I don't know who is the father of Saturn around here. I think all of us are promoting it and pushing it. I've been hot for it but I'm not going to tell you that I started it, because that wouldn't be true."

Although the project was to be kept confidential, press leaks began in early 1983. As cooperation with the United Auto Workers union (UAW) was vital to the success of the project, GM had begun behind-the-scenes discussions with Donald Ephlin, the UAW manager for GM. By October, a joint GM-UAW Study Center was agreed upon.

Motivated in part by claims that the company was turning its back on the United States by building cars in Japan, on November 3, 1983, GM announced a new operating unit, the wholly owned Saturn Corporation, with an initial capitalization of $150 million. It would be the first nameplate added to the General Motors ranks since Chevrolet in 1918. Saturn would incorporate the latest technology available. The operations were to be completely computerized, with robots utilized to reduce direct labor costs, and flexible manufacturing techniques and just-in-time inventory systems introduced.

The importance of the project is evident in the wording of its announcement. Chairman Roger Smith announced Saturn as "the key to GM's long-term competitiveness, survival, and success as a domestic producer. We expect it to be a learning laboratory," he said. "We also expect that what we learn with Saturn will spread throughout GM." He described Saturn as the key to improving every GM plant and product.

Key staff members recognized for bringing the project to this point included Alex Mair of the Technical Staffs Group, Bob Eaton of Advanced Product & Manufacturing Engineering, Irv Rybicki of the Design Staff, and UAW leaders Don Ephlin and Joe Molotke. Executives appointed to take the company forward included the former head of the Oldsmobile Division, Joseph Sanchez, as president; the former executive director of the Saturn project, Reid Rundell, as executive vice-president for strategic planning; John Middlebrook as vice-president for sales, service, and marketing; Tom Manoff as vice-president for finance; Jay Wetzel as vice-president for engineering; and Guy Briggs as vice-president for manufacturing operations. When Sanchez died suddenly on January 26th, William E. Hoglund was appointed president. Hoglund served until Richard G. "Skip" LeFauve succeeded him on February 3, 1986.

COMPANY PERSPECTIVES

Shortly after the first S-Series hit the road back in 1990, a unique tradition was born. Satisfied Saturn owners began dropping by the Spring Hill manufacturing facility to say 'hi.' After a few thousand visits, Saturn took the hint and renovated a horse barn on Haynes Haven Stock Farm. The original atmosphere of the place is still very much intact, a welcome reminder of the company's dedication to the people and the environment in which they live and work.

SATURN IS BORN

The company was launched. On December 19, 1983, a joint GM-UAW Study Center was announced. The following February, 99 people ("the Group of 99") were designated to identify key founding principles for Saturn and to search the world for the best ideas in all areas. The group consisted of a functional cross-section of people, including plant managers, superintendents, union committee members, production workers, and skilled tradesmen, as well as UAW and GM staff from 41 UAW locals and 55 GM plants.

The group split into seven functional teams to explore stamping; metal fabrication and body work; paint and corrosion; trim and hardware; heating, ventilation, and air conditioning; and powertrain and chassis. In all, the Group of 99 visited 49 GM plants and 60 other companies around the world. They made 170 contacts, traveled two million miles, and put in 50,000 hours of effort.

The group's findings were presented in April 1984. The keys to success identified included ownership by all employees, the assumption of responsibility by all, equality and trust among employees, the elimination of barriers to doing a good job, giving staff the authority to do their jobs, and the existence of common goals. Specific recommendations included the use of a conflict resolution process that had been developed by the group and the formation of consensus-driven partnerships within work teams as well as between the union and company management.

The search for a plant location began immediately after the company was announced. Two days later, Illinois Governor James Thompson became the first to visit GM, advocating a site in his state. By the end of the search process, 24 governors had paid visits to GM and 38 states had expressed interest. Donald Avenson, the Speaker of Iowa's House of Representatives, offered to pay half of the first year's wages for workers ($140 million) if Saturn settled in Iowa. Spring Hill, Tennessee, was confirmed as the plant site on July 30, 1985, and construction began in May 1986.

The plant was a mile long and a half mile wide, totalling four million square feet and consisting of four functional buildings: powertrain (engine and transmission systems), body systems (frames, exterior panels), vehicle interior systems (interior trim), and vehicle systems (final assembly). The facilities' core team, which designed the layout, included employees at all levels. The team considered unique lighting requirements in different areas; placed restrooms and cafeterias conveniently; and designed a sophisticated roadway that separated truck traffic from pedestrians, decentralized loading docks so materials arrived where they were needed, and ensured that no one walked more than five minutes from parking lot to work.

As controlling labor costs was crucial to competing with the imports on a cost basis, cooperation with the UAW was an important factor. During the 1980s GM had suffered losses and had laid off 170,000 UAW workers. The competitive environment spurred both sides to work together on improving the prospects for American car manufacturing. Al Warren, vice-president of GM's Industrial Relations staff, and Donald Ephlin, UAW vice-president and director for the General Motors Department, were instrumental in creating a strong bond between Saturn and the UAW.

On July 26, 1985, the UAW executive board approved a unique labor agreement for Saturn. It reduced the number of job classifications, allowed unprecedented flexibility in job content, eliminated work rules, and set pay rates at 80 percent of the base rate at other GM plants with the difference made up in performance incentives. All Saturn workers were salaried and participated in a "risk-reward" system in which they lost 20 percent of their pay if the company did not reach common goals (e.g., sales goals), but earned proportional bonuses if goals were exceeded. Each team managed its own budget, inventory, and hiring.

KEY DATES

1983:
GM launches a small car division called Saturn to compete against small, high-quality imports.
1985:
GM decides to build Saturn's plant in Spring Hill, Tennessee.
1985:
The United Auto Workers union (UAW) agrees to help Saturn design its company.
1990:
GM chairman Roger Smith drives the first Saturn off the production line on July 30; the first Saturns are delivered to a dealership on October 11.
1994:
Saturn's best-selling year; 286,003 units of the S-series are sold.
1998:
UAW authorizes a strike at the Spring Hill plant.
1999:
Saturn releases its second model called the L-series.
2000:
Saturn Ion replaces the S-series.
2002:
Saturn releases its first SUV called the Vue.
2004:
GM assumes more control of Saturn and restructures the entire division.
2006:
A new Saturn midsize sedan and two-seat roadster are introduced.

Training was an important part of Saturn's human resource strategy. Workers spent between 250 and 750 hours in training to become "job-ready." On the job, they spent a minimum of 5 percent of each year in training. Workers were acclimated to Saturn's philosophy through core courses on conflict management, consensus decision making, and team dynamics. They also received specialized technical training on machinery, parts quality, and working with vendors. The training program sought to promote teamwork, self-direction, initiative, and responsibility. In 1992, Saturn's success in managing human resources could be measured by the lowest absentee rate in the industry: absenteeism at Saturn was 2.5 percent, a far cry from the 14 percent at other GM plants.

As other elements of the company were being developed, product development staff were working on the cars. The first demonstration vehicle was completed on September 15, 1984. Although Saturn was a "no year" project (it had no set launch date), GM chairman Roger Smith was determined to begin production before he retired. He drove the first car off the production line on July 30, 1990, one day before he retired and turned the reins over to Robert Stempel.

The first truckload of Saturns was sent to dealers in California on October 11, 1990. By November the company garnered several awards, including the Popular Science "1990 Best of What's New in Automobiles" and an award from the Society of Plastics Engineers for its thermoplastic door panel. In June 1992 the first exports went to Taiwan. Annual production quickly reached 240,000 units, and buyers were lined up on waiting lists, but the company was still losing money. By 1993 Saturn expected to raise production to 320,000, allowing the company to turn its first profit; the product line included seven models of sedans, coupes, and wagons.

In developing parts and manufacturing processes, Saturn employed Product Development Teams (PDTs) consisting of manufacturing engineers, finance staff, materials managers, quality engineers, and UAW technicians. The teams decided what materials to stock and evaluated prospective suppliers for quality, price, and efficient organization.

In keeping with the "complete job-focus" philosophy, a part was manufactured from start to finish in one place. Ergonomics was another important consideration. Equipment, which was "low-tech and people-oriented," was chosen by its users and frequently adjusted to individuals. Whereas workers must crawl inside the vehicle to work on the cockpit of most cars, Saturn cockpits were assembled in a fixture that can be rotated for the comfort of the individual worker. A skillet system allowed workers to ride on a moving platform with the car as it moved down the assembly line. While the basic system was copied from GM's Opel facility in Germany, Saturn widened the platform and turned the cars sideways, saving 40 percent in floor space.

In the engine and transmission area, lost-foam casting was used on a large scale for the first time, providing casting precision, flexibility, material savings, minimal tool wear, and reduced machining. In making trim, plastic colors were mixed at the injection molding machine, reducing change-over time and costs. Other innovative production methods included an environmentally sound waterborne paint process and a method of testing transmissions with air rather than oil.

SERVICE AND MARKETING

Marketing was another central issue at Saturn. The first marketing customer clinic was held in San Francisco in March 1985, five years before production began. The car itself was designed to be adaptable to changing consumer preferences. Whereas older cars depend on exterior panels for structural strength, Saturns are structurally based on a strong "space frame" to which the exterior "skin" is attached, allowing for quick style changes. Saturn's marketing philosophy was concerned with bringing in "plus business" (non-GM buyers). Based upon the profile of imported car buyers, the targeted Saturn consumer would be an average of 38 years old, earning an average of $51,000 annually. A large percentage would live on the West Coast and 50 percent would be college graduates.

The Saturn Marketing Planning Team incorporated the ideas of 16 dealers representing 25 manufacturers. Led by Donald Hudler, the team studied distribution methods of 30 major U.S. corporations and came up with Saturn's Market Area Approach (MAA), which was announced on May 26, 1987. MAA set up 300 "territories" to be handled by individual franchised dealers.

Saturn sought the consistency of service lacking in the GM dealer network. In early 1989 dealers were invited to apply for franchises. Saturn dealers were trained in low-pressure sales and were encouraged to pay salaries rather than commissions. The strong demand for the car, coupled with significant dealership control over territory, enabled Saturn dealers to average twice the unit sales volume of other car dealerships. In addition, the August 3, 1992, Business Week noted that a 17 percent gross margin was built into the "no-haggle" sticker price (while other cars averaged 12 percent).

An important step in defining Saturn's marketing strategy was the selection of an advertising agency. Fifty agencies had applied for consideration by a review panel composed of two Saturn executives, two retailers, and a UAW representative, but the agency chosen was not among them. Thomas Shafer, Director of Marketing Services, felt that it was important to consider West Coast agencies since the small car market was most competitive there. As a result, the Hal Riney & Partners agency was named as Saturn's "communications partner" on May 24, 1988. Riney set about creating a "charismatic brand." He felt strongly that model names would detract from the Saturn name and insisted that the cars simply be called "Saturns," with numbers distinguishing various models. Dealerships would be called "Saturn of x" and colors would be "red" rather than the more pretentious "raspberry red." Saturn advertising was designed to be emotionally driven, with a focus on the human element rather than the product. In February 1989 the first print ad appeared, even though cars would not be available for more than a year.

In addition to external marketing work, Riney assisted the new company with internal communications. In April 1989 Riney produced "Spring, in Spring Hill," a documentary explaining the company to employees, suppliers, and the press. It was later aired as an infomercial. In the film, team members explained what the project meant to them. In the words of a Riney executive, "We wanted to get people rooting for Saturn, the company."

Saturn lost $800,000 in 1990 with calendar year sales of 1,881 units. 1991 calendar year sales were 74,493 units, and 1992 sales reached 196,126 units by December 31, with a substantial number of additional units back-ordered. In the 1992 model year Saturn earned a 2.8 percent market share. It was estimated that the company needed to sell 300,000 cars per year to make a profit. Increasing capacity significantly would require further investment in new facilities or the retooling of an existing plant. Building new capacity was problematic as GM continued to close old plants; retooling, however, also presented problems, as duplication of the innovations in the Spring Hill plant was a formidable task. In addition, there were few existing facilities large enough to accommodate the manufacturing of all necessary components at one site, as Saturn did in Spring Hill.

By mid-1992 Saturn cars had 95 percent domestic content and were ranked as the highest-quality American cars, with defect ratings rivaling those of top Honda and Nissan vehicles and customer satisfaction ratings outpaced only by Lexus and Infiniti. On the negative side, the company was far from recouping the undisclosed billions that GM had invested in it and was not operating at full capacity. In addition, an average of 35 hours of labor were required per car, compared to the stated company goal of 20 hours.

In an effort to transfer experience gained at Saturn throughout GM, the company moved several Saturn executives to other divisions. GM President and CEO Jack Smith, who succeeded Robert Stempel in 1992 after the latter's controversial ouster, talked about "Saturnizing" all of GM. Yet, as Donald Ephlin noted, "One of the things GM does very poorly is spread improvements across the system."

In 1993 Saturn was set to sell 200,000 cars, garnering 1.4 percent of the market. Commentators noted that while the cars themselves were not exceptional, the company was truly excelling at advertising and customer satisfaction, giving the Saturn mystique considerable weight. In June 1994, for example 44,000 Saturn owners and their families drove their Saturns to Spring Hill for a three-day "homecoming," a feel-good event in which the relationships between dealer and customers were further cemented. Saturn's sales had fallen, however, from a peak of 25,000 per month the year before to 15,000 per month in 1994. The drop was attributed to several factors. Despite building a reputation for having happy customers, Saturn was presented with several challenges in 1994. GM, which was short of cash, cut back on Saturn's advertising budget, which was halved; plans to expand the dealer network were put on hold, with 285 dealers serving only about 60 percent of the U.S. market; product enhancements, including a facelift and passenger airbags, were delayed from the 1994 to the 1995 model year; and modifications that would decrease engine noise were delayed until 1996. The car was also facing more formidable competition from domestic rivals, including the Dodge and Plymouth Neon. Michael Bennett, president of UAW Local 1853 in Spring Hill, stated that if Saturn didn't build a second assembly plant soon, the company was doomed to extinction much like the American Motors Corp., which was too small to survive. While the Spring Hill plant was capable of producing 325,000 cars a year, Bennett maintained that Saturn needed 500,000 to make a profit. Profitability was impossible for outsiders to assess, as GM refused to release financial data on the company.

In 1995 Saturn reached two important milestones, as its millionth vehicle rolled off the line after ten years of production. Reports indicated that the company planned to add a larger sedan to its offerings, to be built at a plant in Wilmington, Delaware, that was otherwise scheduled for closing. While this was good news for the line, other GM divisions were concerned that expansion by Saturn would cannibalize their own sales. By May, sales of the original line were up 17.5 percent for the year, in a segment that was down 14.4 percent overall. However, officials were concerned about the effects of Saturn's limited product line as the company's target market, the baby boom generation, grew older and became interested in trading up. For their part, critics continued to complain about the Saturn's dull styling and engine noise.

Nevertheless, the experiment continued, as Saturn took the battle for small-car dominance to its most formidable competitors' home turf, appointing six distributors in Japan in 1996. Keith Wicks, general director of Saturn Japan, stated, "We are convinced the high quality of Saturn cars, combined with friendly customer treatment and service at our Saturn retailer, will make a difference even for very discerning Japanese consumers." The right-hand drive vehicles were to be available in ten to 15 showrooms when sales began in 1997. Sales remained strong at home: president Don Hudler stated at mid-year that if the company could produce them, Saturn could sell about 50,000 more cars a year, a number that would generate about $600 million in revenue. In August General Motors confirmed that it would build a midsize Saturn in Wilmington. The car would be based on the same platform as the Vectra, a European offering from GM.

Noting that the car would be built at an existing GM facility, some observers took the decision as a sign that GM was serious not only about investing in Saturn's success, but also about spreading Saturn's accomplishments beyond Spring Hill, to the rest of the company. Drew Winter of Ward's Auto World wrote: "From a business standpoint, or even according to Saturn's own mission statement, it probably is too soon to call Saturn an unqualified success. But as sales remain strong, details of a global strategy continue to leak out, and GM's overall customer satisfaction shows marked improvement, it sure doesn't look like a loser."

In July 1998 the UAW squelched its sanguine relationship with Saturn when the union authorized a strike at Saturn's Spring Hill plant. Workers were unhappy about a proposal to outsource the assembly of future Saturns. They were also dissatisfied by the low-yielding goal-based bonus plan and skeptical about GM's long-term commitment to the Saturn brand. Much of GM's marketing budget was being used to stoke the popularity of GM's sports utility vehicles. The UAW only authorized the strike; it was never executed. Both parties resolved their differences by early September. At the year's end, Saturn's president Hudler was transferred to a new Saturn retailing unit. Hudler's vacancy was filled by Cynthia Trudell, who had served as president over GM's IBC Vehicles facility in the United Kingdom.

EXPANDING THE PRODUCT LINE: 1999 AND BEYOND

When Saturn finally did release a new vehicle in 1999 it was the ill-fated L-series, a midsize sedan designed to compete with the Toyota Camry and Honda Accord. The car was built at GM's Wilmington, Delaware, plant. After it was redesigned the L-series was renamed the L-300, and Saturn projected that it would sell 200,000 units a year. In reality, sales peaked at 98,000 units in 2001. In 2002 the L-300 was only ranked 19th out of 25 in a quality survey of midsize sedans conducted by J. D. Power & Associates Inc.

More new models followed. The Saturn Ion was released in 2000 to replace the S-series. Sales for the Ion were less than originally projected. Branching out from the small and midsize automobile market, Saturn released a gas-conscious SUV titled the Vue in March 2002. The Vue's 24 mpg gas mileage was achieved by using a system of pulleys instead of gears, keeping the SUV true to Saturn's alternative-car image. The Vue was criticized by automotive analysts for lacking style and entering the SUV market too late, but demand for the Vue steadily increased. Sales were up 6 percent in 2004 over 2003. Unimpressed, industry analysts predicted that the Saturn brand, which had cost GM billions, was nearing an end. Saturn's best year was 1994 when it sold 286,003 units of the S-series.

In 2004 GM executives decided that if Saturn was going to be profitable, they needed to shake up Saturn's infrastructure. To reduce manufacturing costs, future Saturn models would be designed to use parts shared by other GM divisions. Saturn's rewards program was also discontinued. Workers received a $3,000 bonus in 2004, and instead of rewarding employees when the company accomplished certain goals, the employees were told what their exact pay would be for the following two years. GM then assumed more control over Saturn's upper management.

In late 2004 the production of the unsuccessful L-300 ended. GM then promised to spend $3 billion producing new Saturn models. "You can say that we let the [Saturn] product get too long in the tooth, but I'm optimistic, confident, the new Saturn products will be very well received," Gary Cowger, GM's president of North American operations, said that year in The Globe and Mail. In late 2004 Saturn released its first minivan, called the Relay. Saturn then unveiled a convertible roadster, the Saturn Sky, at the 2005 Detroit Auto Show. Designed at GM's Advanced Design Studio in the United Kingdom, the wide-based Sky was one of the first Saturns widely praised for its styling. The Saturn Aura, a midsize sedan that was designed to replace the L-300, was also unveiled at the auto show. Neither the Sky nor the Aura were distributed until 2006. Favorable reviews about Saturn's new additions fanned excitement about the brand's resurrection throughout GM. In 2005 Saturn sold 214,000 vehicles, an improvement over previous years. Also in 2006, Saturn revealed hybrid versions of the Vue and a larger SUV called the Outlook to be available in 2007. Although Saturn still was not performing up to past expectations, and the auto industry in general was faced with enormous economic challenges, GM believed Saturn definitely had a future.

                                      Mary-Sophia Smith

                      Updated, Paula Kepos, Kevin Teague

PRINCIPAL COMPETITORS

Ford Motor Company; Toyota Motor Corporation; DaimlerChrysler AG; Honda Motor Co., Ltd.; Kia Motors Corporation; Mazda Motor Corporation; Nissan Motor Co., Ltd.; Volkswagen AG.

FURTHER READING

Aaker, David A., "Building a Brand: The Saturn Story," California Management Review, Winter 1994.

Booth, David, "Saturn Soars to a Higher Orbit," National Post, April 28, 2006, p. DT2.

Butler, Lacrisha, "Sasser Praises Saturn Work," Tennessean, Nashville, October 7, 1992.

DeMott, John S., "Saturn Makes Its Debut at GM," Time, January 21, 1985.

"First Month Brings 100 Saturn Sales in Japan," New York Times, May 8, 1997.

Gilbert, Stuart C., "Observations on the Saturn Project: Site Selection, Financia," Economic Development Review, Fall 1994.

Gruley, Bryan, and Ann M. Job, "Saturn Sets Off 'Civil War'," Detroit News, January 27, 1985.

Haig, Simonian, "GM Pins Hopes on the Saturn Concept: The U.S. Car Maker Plans to Widen the Scope of Its Innovative Subsidiary," Financial Times, August 17, 1996.

, "Saturn Takes on Japan's Market for Small Cars," Financial Times, July 9, 1996.

Higgins, James V., "Saturn's Revolution: How GM Set the Course to Next Century," Detroit News, January 13, 1985.

Klayman, Ben, "GM Hourly Workers Authorize Saturn Strike." Reuters News, July 19, 1998.

Lippert, John, and Greg Gardner, "Saturn Needs to Expand to Survive, Says United Auto Workers Union," Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News, January 10, 1994.

McGrory, Mary, "Saturn Gives U.S. Autos Some Get-Up-And-Go," Tennessean, December 1, 1992.

"Saturn Beats Benz, Acura in Survey," Flint Journal, June 30, 1992.

"Saturn: GM's Final Frontier," Automobile Quarterly, Fall 1992.

"Saturn Names President From GM British Subsidiary," Cleveland Plain Dealer, December 15, 1998, p. 1C.

Serafin, Raymond, "The Saturn Story: How Saturn Became One of the Most Successful Brands in Marketing History," Advertising Age, November 16, 1992.

Taylor, Alex, "Blah Car, Bad BookIn the Rings of Saturn by Joe Sherman," Fortune, November 29, 1993.

Vaughan, Michael, "We're On The Comeback Trail," Globe and Mail, April 13, 2006, p. G2.

Welch, David, "Can Saturn Get Off The Ground Again?" Business Week, October 14, 2002, p. 79.

White, John R., "General Motors Should Build Everything As Well As It Builds Its Saturns," Boston Globe, November 15, 1992.

White, Joseph B., and Melinda Grenier Guiles, "Rough Launch: GM's Plan for Saturn, to Beat Small Imports, Trails Original Goals," Wall Street Journal, July 7, 1990.

Whiteside, David, "How GM's Saturn Could Run Rings Around Old Style Carmakers," Business Week, January 28, 1985.

Winter, Drew, "Saturn Turns 10," Ward's Auto World, July 1995.

Woodruff, David, "Saturn: GM Finally Has a Real Winner, but Success Is Bringing a Fresh Batch of Problems," Business Week, August 17, 1992.

, "Saturn: May We Help You Kick the Tires?" Business Week, August 3, 1992.

Cite this article
Pick a style below, and copy the text for your bibliography.

  • MLA
  • Chicago
  • APA

"Saturn Corporation." International Directory of Company Histories. . Encyclopedia.com. 22 Oct. 2017 <http://www.encyclopedia.com>.

"Saturn Corporation." International Directory of Company Histories. . Encyclopedia.com. (October 22, 2017). http://www.encyclopedia.com/books/politics-and-business-magazines/saturn-corporation

"Saturn Corporation." International Directory of Company Histories. . Retrieved October 22, 2017 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/books/politics-and-business-magazines/saturn-corporation

Saturn Corporation

Saturn Corporation

1420 Stevenson Highway
Troy, Michigan 48007-7025
U.S.A.
(800) 522-5000
Fax: (313) 528-6300
Web site: http://www.saturn.com

Wholly Owned Subsidiary of General Motors Corporation
Incorporated:
1983
Employees: 6,904
Sales: $750 million
SICs: 3711 Motor Vehicles & Car Bodies

Saturn Corporation grew out of a project begun in 1982 within General Motors Corp. to explore the potential for building a small car of superior quality and value as efficiently as possible, combining the most advanced technology with the newest approaches to management. Saturn realized its goal by producing a car ranked behind only the Lexus and the Infiniti (imported luxury cars produced by Toyota and Nissan) in the 1992 J. D. Power & Associates customer satisfaction survey. Saturn is regarded as more than simply a successful product, however; the company is seen as nothing less than the embodiment of GMs vision of modern corporate ideals.

Saturn was the product of an extraordinary effort within GM to create a company from scratch, without any preconceived notions and combining the most advanced techniques and ideas in all areas. From community and employee involvment in decision making, to environmentally responsible plant design, to dealers trained to avoid the high-pressure sales techniques typical of traditional car salesmen, Saturn has sought to embody a 1990s model of corporate enlightenment. Recognized for its innovations in product design and production methodologies, the company has been the recipient of a great deal of positive publicity. At the same time, however, critics note that its accomplishments have been achieved slowly and at great expense.

Industry Climate Prompts the Birth of Saturn

Saturn grew out of a particular climate within the car industry. Traditionally, the Big Three automakers (General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler) had built large cars, emphasizing features and comfort. The industry began to change in the 1950s when foreign car makers (notably Renault and Volkswagen) offered American consumers smaller cars at lower prices. Imports had claimed a 10.1 percent market share by 1959, but they were pushed back to a 4.8 percent share in 1962 after the introduction of the Corvair (GM), the Valiant (Chrysler), and the Falcon (Ford) in 1960.

By the late 1960s, the Big Three began to be challenged by Japanese car manufacturers. The Vega was GMs answer to the challenge. In 1968 GM announced that it would build the Vega from scratch rather than redesign another GM car. The finished product, introduced in 1970, proved disappointing. Vegas were prone to rust, and their aluminum engines warped. The Chevette, GMs more successful small car introduced in 1975, was nearing the end of its 10-year product cycle when GM began to work on a replacement, code-named the S car. In 1981 GM determined that the S car could be built much less expensively by Isuzu (GM had bought 34.2 percent of Isuzu in 1971). Its next small car (the Chevrolet Spectrum) was built in Japan. This series of events confirmed in some peoples minds the suspicion that U.S. automakers couldnt produce small cars competitively. As smaller cars were widely believed to represent the future direction of the industry, the episode called into question the likelihood of the long-term survival of the Big Three. To address this concern, Ford initiated the Alpha project and Chrysler began work on Concept 90.

At GM an internal project to build an affordable, high-quality, small car to compete with the imports was approved in May 1982 by GM Vice-Chairman Howard Kehrl in conjunction with Alex Mair and Robert Eaton, vice-presidents in charge of design and engineering. On June 15 Alex Mair sat down with engineers Joe Joseph and Tom Ankeny to sketch out the plan. By July the project had been dubbed Saturn, a reference to the Saturn rocket that propelled the American astronauts to the moon during the space race with the Soviet Union.

The project enjoyed strong sponsorship from the highest ranks of the company. In keeping with the emphasis on consensus throughout Saturn, no one in particular is considered the projects founding father. In the words of then-GM Chief Roger Smith, I dont know who is the father of Saturn around here. I think all of us are promoting it and pushing it. Ive been hot for it but Im not going to tell you that I started it, because that wouldnt be true.

Although the project was to be kept confidential, press leaks began in early 1983. As cooperation with the U AW was vital to the success of the project, GM had begun behind-the-scenes discussions with Donald Ephlin, the UAW manager for GM. By October, a joint GM-UAW Study Center was agreed upon.

Motivated in part by claims that the company was turning its back on the United States by building cars in Japan, on November 3, 1983, GM announced a new operating unit, the wholly owned Saturn Corporation, with an initial capitalization of $150 million. It would be the first nameplate added to the General Motors ranks since Chevrolet in 1918. Saturn would incorporate the latest technology available. The operations were to be completely computerized, with robots utilized to reduce direct labor costs, and flexible manufacturing techniques and just-in-time inventory systems introduced.

The importance of the project is evident in the wording of its announcement. Chairman Roger Smith announced Saturn as the key to GMs long-term competitiveness, survival, and success as a domestic producer. We expect it to be a learning laboratory, he said. We also expect that what we learn with Saturn will spread throughout GM. He described Saturn as the key to improving every GM plant and product.

Key staff members recognized for bringing the project to this point included Alex Mair of the Technical Staffs Group, Bob Eaton of Advanced Product & Manufacturing Engineering, Irv Rybicki of the Design Staff, and UAW leaders Don Ephlin and Joe Molotke. Executives appointed to take the company forward included the former head of the Oldsmobile Division, Joseph Sanchez, as president; the former executive director of the Saturn project, Reid Rundell, as executive vice-president for strategic planning; John Middlebrook as vice-president for sales, service, and marketing; Tom Manoff as vice-president for finance; Jay Wetzel as vice-president for engineering; and Guy Briggs as vice-president for manufacturing operations. When Sanchez died suddenly on January 26th, William E. Hoglund was appointed president. Hoglund served until Richard G. Skip LeFauve succeeded him on February 3, 1986.

The 1980s: Saturn is Born

The company was launched. On December 19, 1983, a joint GM-UAW Study Center was announced. The following February, 99 people (the Group of 99) were designated to identify key founding principles for Saturn and to search the world for the best ideas in all areas. The group consisted of a functional cross-section of people, including plant managers, superintendents, union committee members, production workers, and skilled tradesmen, as well as UAW and GM staff from 41 UAW locals and 55 GM plants.

The group split into seven functional teams to explore stamping; metal fabrication and body work; paint and corrosion; trim and hardware; heating, ventilation, and air conditioning; and powertrain and chassis. In all, the Group of 99 visited 49 GM plants and 60 other companies around the world. They made 170 contacts, traveled two million miles, and put in 50,000 hours of effort.

The groups findings were presented in April 1984. The keys to success identified included ownership by all employees, the assumption of responsibility by all, equality and trust among employees, the elimination of barriers to doing a good job, giving staff the authority to do their jobs, and the existence of common goals. Specific recommendations included the use of a conflict resolution process that had been developed by the group and the formation of consensus-driven partnerships within work teams as well as between the union and company management.

The search for a plant location began immediately after the company was announced. Two days later, Illinois Governor James Thompson became the first to visit GM, advocating a site in his state. By the end of the search process, 24 governors had paid visits to GM and 38 states had expressed interest. Donald Avenson, the Speaker of Iowas House of Representatives, offered to pay half of the first years wages for workers ($140 million) if Saturn settled in Iowa. Spring Hill, Tennessee, was confirmed as the plant site on July 30, 1985, and construction began in May 1986.

The plant is a mile long and half mile wide, totalling four million square feet and consisting of four functional buildings: powertrain (engine and transmission systems), body systems (frames, exterior panels), vehicle interior systems (interior trim), and vehicle systems (final assembly). The facilities core team, which designed the layout, included employees at all levels. The team considered unique lighting requirements in different areas; placed restrooms and cafeterias conveniently; and designed a sophisticated roadway that separates truck traffic from pedestrians, decentralizes loading docks so materials arrive where they are needed, and ensures that no one walks more than five minutes from parking lot to work.

Company Perspectives:

Saturns mission is to market vehicles developed and manufactured in the U.S. that are world leaders in quality, cost, and customer satisfaction through the integration of people, technology, and business systems and to transfer knowledge, technology, and experience throughout General Motors.

As controlling labor costs was crucial to competing with the imports on a cost basis, cooperation with the UAW was an important factor. During the 1980s GM had suffered losses and had laid off 170,000 UAW workers. The competitive environment spurred both sides to work together on improving the prospects for American car manufacturing. Al Warren, vicepresident of GMs Industrial Relations staff, and Donald Ephlin, UAW vice-president and director for the General Motors Department, were instrumental in creating a strong bond between Saturn and the UAW.

On July 26, 1985, the UAW executive board approved a unique labor agreement for Saturn. It reduced the number of job classifications, allowed unprecedented flexibility in job content, eliminated work rules, and set pay rates at 80 percent of the base rate at other GM plants with the difference made up in performance incentives. All Saturn workers were salaried and participated in a risk-reward system in which they lost 20 percent of their pay if the company did not reach common goals (e.g., sales goals), but earned proportional bonuses if goals were exceeded. Each team managed its own budget, inventory, and hiring.

Training was an important part of Saturns human resource strategy. Workers spent between 250 and 750 hours in training to become job-ready. On the job, they spent a minimum of five percent of each year in training. Workers were acclimated to Saturns philosophy through core courses on conflict management, consensus decision making, and team dynamics. They also received specialized technical training on machinery, parts quality, and working with vendors. The training program sought to promote teamwork, self-direction, initiative, and responsibility. In 1992, Saturns success in managing human resources could be measured by the lowest absentee rate in the industry: absenteeism at Saturn was 2.5 percent, a far cry from the 14 percent at other GM plants.

As other elements of the company were being developed, product development staff were working on the cars. The first demonstration vehicle was completed on September 15, 1984. Although Saturn was a no year project (it had no set launch date), GM chairman Roger Smith was determined to begin production before he retired. He drove the first car off the production line on July 30, 1990, one day before he retired and turned the reins over to Robert Stempel.

The first truckload of Saturns was sent to dealers in California on October 11, 1990. By November the company garnered several awards, including the Popular Science 1990 Best of Whats New in Automobiles and an award from the Society of Plastics Engineers for its thermoplastic door panel. In June 1992 the first exports went to Taiwan. Annual production quickly reached 240,000 units, and buyers were lined up on waiting lists, but the company was still losing money. By 1993 Saturn expected to raise production to 320,000, allowing the company to turn its first profit; the product line included seven models of sedans, coupes, and wagons.

In developing parts and manufacturing processes, Saturn employed Product Development Teams (PDTs) consisting of manufacturing engineers, finance staff, materials managers, quality engineers, and UAW technicians. The teams decided what materials to stock and evaluated prospective suppliers for quality, price, and efficient organization.

In keeping with the complete job-focus philosophy, a part was manufactured from start to finish in one place. Ergonomics was another important consideration. Equipment, which was low-tech and people-oriented, was chosen by its users and frequently adjusted to individuals. Whereas workers must crawl inside the vehicle to work on the cockpit of most cars, Saturn cockpits were assembled in a fixture that can be rotated for the comfort of the individual worker. A skillet system allowed workers to ride on a moving platform with the car as it moved down the assembly line. While the basic system was copied from GMs Opel facility in Germany, Saturn widened the platform and turned the cars sideways, saving 40 percent in floor space.

In the engine and transmission area, lost-foam casting was used on a large scale for the first time, providing casting precision, flexibility, material savings, minimal tool wear, and reduced machining. In making trim, plastic colors were mixed at the injection molding machine, reducing change-over time and costs. Other innovative production methods included an environmentally sound waterborne paint process and a method of testing transmissions with air rather than oil.

Service and Marketing for the 1990s

Marketing was another central issue at Saturn. The first marketing customer clinic was held in San Francisco in March 1985, five years before production began. The car itself was designed to be adaptable to changing consumer preferences. Whereas older cars depend on exterior panels for structural strength, Saturns are structurally based on a strong space frame to which the exterior skin is attached, allowing for quick style changes. Saturns marketing philosophy was concerned with bringing in plus business (non-GM buyers). Based upon the profile of imported car buyers, the targeted Saturn consumer would be an average of 38 years old, earning an average of $51,000 annually. A large percentage would live on the West Coast and 50 percent would be college graduates.

The Saturn Marketing Planning Team incorporated the ideas of 16 dealers representing 25 manufacturers. Led by Donald Hudler, the team studied distribution methods of 30 major U.S. corporations and came up with Saturns Market Area Approach (MAA), which was announced on May 26, 1987. MAA set up 300 territories to be handled by individual franchised dealers.

Saturn sought the consistency of service lacking in the GM dealer network. In early 1989 dealers were invited to apply for franchises. Saturn dealers were trained in low-pressure sales and were encouraged to pay salaries rather than commissions. The strong demand for the car, coupled with significant dealership control over territory, enabled Saturn dealers to average twice the unit sales volume of other car dealerships. In addition, the August 3, 1992, Business Week noted that a 17 percent gross margin was built into the no-haggle sticker price (while other cars averaged 12 percent).

An important step in defining Saturns marketing strategy was the selection of an advertising agency. Fifty agencies had applied for consideration by a review panel composed of two Saturn executives, two retailers, and a UAW representative, but the agency chosen was not among them. Thomas Shafer, Director of Marketing Services, felt that it was important to consider West Coast agencies since the small car market was most competitive there. As a result, the Hal Riney & Partners agency was named as Saturns communications partner on May 24, 1988. Riney set about creating a charismatic brand. He felt strongly that model names would detract from the Saturn name and insisted that the cars simply be called Saturns, with numbers distinguishing various models. Dealerships would be called Saturn of x and colors would be red rather than the more pretentious raspberry red. Saturn advertising was designed to be emotionally driven, with a focus on the human element rather than the product. In February 1989 the first print ad appeared, even though cars would not be available for more than a year.

In addition to external marketing work, Riney assisted the new company with internal communications. In April 1989 Riney produced Spring, in Spring Hill, a documentary explaining the company to employees, suppliers, and the press. It was later aired as an infomercial. In the film, team members explained what the project meant to them. In the words of a Riney executive, We wanted to get people rooting for Saturn, the company.

Saturn lost $800,000 in 1990 with calendar year sales of 1,881 units. 1991 calendar year sales were 74,493 units, and 1992 sales reached 196,126 units by December 31, with a substantial number of additional units back-ordered. In the 1992 model year Saturn earned a 2.8 percent market share. It was estimated that the company needed to sell 300,000 cars per year to make a profit. Increasing capacity significantly would require further investment in new facilities or the retooling of an existing plant. Building new capacity was problematic as GM continued to close old plants; retooling, however, also presented problems, as duplication of the innovations in the Spring Hill plant was a formidable task. In addition, there were few existing facilities large enough to accommodate the manufacturing of all necessary components at one site, as Saturn did in Spring Hill.

By mid-1992 Saturn cars had 95 percent domestic content and were ranked as the highest-quality American cars, with defect ratings rivaling those of top Honda and Nissan vehicles and customer satisfaction ratings outpaced only by Lexus and Infiniti. On the negative side, the company was far from recouping the undisclosed billions that GM had invested in it and was not operating at full capacity. In addition, an average of 35 hours of labor were required per car, compared to the stated company goal of 20 hours.

In an effort to transfer experience gained at Saturn throughout GM, the company moved several Saturn executives to other divisions. GM President and CEO Jack Smith, who succeeded Robert Stempel in 1992 after the latters controversial ouster, talked about Saturnizing all of GM. Yet, as Donald Ephlin noted, One of the things GM does very poorly is spread improvements across the system.

In 1993 Saturn was set to sell 200,000 cars, garnering 1.4 percent of the market. Commentators noted that while the cars themselves were not exceptional, the company was truly excelling at advertising and customer satisfaction, giving the Saturn mystique considerable weight. In June 1994, for example 44,000 Saturn owners and their families drove their Saturns to Spring Hill for a three-day homecoming, a feel-good event in which the relationships between dealer and customers were further cemented. Saturns sales had fallen, however, from a peak of 25,000 per month the year before to 15,000 per month in 1994. The drop was attributed to several factors: GM, which was short of cash, cut back on Saturns advertising budget, which was halved; plans to expand the dealer network were put on hold, with 285 dealers serving only about 60 percent of the U.S. market; product enhancements, including a facelift and passenger airbags, were delayed from the 1994 to the 1995 model year; and modifications that would decrease engine noise were delayed until 1996. The car was also facing more formidable competition from domestic rivals, including the Dodge and Plymouth Neon. Michael Bennett, president of UAW Local 1853 in Spring Hill, stated that if Saturn didnt build a second assembly plant soon, the company was doomed to extinction much like the American Motors Corp., which was too small to survive. While the Spring Hill plant was capable of producing 325,000 cars a year, Bennett maintained that Saturn needed 500,000 to make a profit. Profitability was impossible for outsiders to assess, as GM refused to release financial data on the company.

In 1995 Saturn reached two important milestones, as its millionth vehicle rolled off the line after ten years of production. Reports indicated that the company planned to add a larger sedan to its offerings, to be built at a plant in Wilmington, Delaware, that was otherwise scheduled for closing. While this was good news for the line, other GM divisions were concerned that expansion by Saturn would cannibalize their own sales. By May, sales of the original line were up 17.5 percent for the year, in a segment that was down 14.4 percent overall. However, officials were concerned about the effects of Saturns limited product line as the companys target market, the baby boom generation, grew older and became interested in trading up. For their part, critics continued to complain about the Saturns dull styling and engine noise.

Nevertheless, the experiment continued, as Saturn took the battle for small-car dominance to its most formidable competitors home turf, appointing six distributors in Japan in 1996. Keith Wicks, general director of Saturn Japan, stated, We are convinced the high quality of Saturn cars, combined with friendly customer treatment and service at our Saturn retailer, will make a difference even for very discerning Japanese consumers. The right-hand drive vehicles were to be available in 10 to 15 showrooms when sales began in 1997. Sales remained strong at home: president Don Hudler stated at mid-year that if the company could produce them, Saturn could sell about 50,000 more cars a year, a number that would generate about $600 million in revenue. In August General Motors confirmed that it would build a mid-size Saturn in Wilmington. The car would be based on the same platform as the Vectra, a European offering from GM.

Noting that the car would be built at an existing GM facility, some observers took the decision as a sign that GM was serious not only about investing in Saturns success, but also about spreading Saturns accomplishments beyond Spring Hill, to the rest of the company. Commentator Drew Winter wrote: From a business standpoint, or even according to Saturns own mission statement, it probably is too soon to call Saturn an unqualified success. But as sales remain strong, details of a global strategy continue to leak out, and GMs overall customer satisfaction shows marked improvement, it sure doesnt look like a loser.

Further Reading

Aaker, David A., Building a Brand: The Saturn Story, California Management Review, Winter 1994.

Butler, Lacrisha, Sasser Praises Saturn Work, The Tennessean, Nashville, October 7, 1992.

DeMott, John S., Saturn Makes Its Debut at GM, Time, January 21, 1985.

First Month Brings 100 Saturn Sales in Japan, New York Times, May 8, 1997.

Gilbert, Stuart C., Observations on the Saturn Project: Site Selection, Financia, Economic Development Review, Fall 1994.

Gruley, Bryan, and Ann M. Job, Saturn Sets Off Civil War, Detroit News, January 27, 1985.

Haig, Simonian, GM Pins Hopes on the Saturn Concept: The U.S. Car Maker Plans to Widen the Scope of Its Innovative Subsidiary, Financial Times, August 17, 1996.

, Saturn Takes on Japans Market for Small Cars, Financial Times, July 9, 1996.

Higgins, James V., Saturns Revolution: How GM Set the Course to Next Century, Detroit News, January 13, 1985.

Lippert, John, and Greg Gardner, Saturn Needs to Expand to Survive, Says United Auto Workers Union, Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News, January 10, 1994.

McGrory, Mary, Saturn Gives U.S. Autos Some Get-Up-And-Go, The Tennessean, Nashville, December 1, 1992.

Saturn Beats Benz, Acura in Survey, Flint Journal, June 30, 1992.

Saturn: GMs Final Frontier, Automobile Quarterly, Fall 1992.

Serafin, Raymond, The Saturn Story: How Saturn Became One of the Most Successful Brands in Marketing History, Advertising Age, November 16, 1992.

Taylor, Alex, Blah Car, Bad BookIn the Rings of Saturn by Joe Sherman, Fortune, November 29, 1993.

White, John R., General Motors Should Build Everything As Well As It Builds Its Saturns, Boston Globe, November 15, 1992.

White, Joseph B., and Melinda Grenier Guiles, Rough Launch: GMs Plan for Saturn, to Beat Small Imports, Trails Original Goals, Wall Street Journal, July 7, 1990.

Whiteside, David, How GMs Saturn Could Run Rings Around Old Style Carmakers, Business Week, January 28, 1985.

Winter, Drew, Saturn Turns 10, Wards Auto World, July 1995.

Woodruff, David, Saturn: GM Finally Has a Real Winner, but Success Is Bringing a Fresh Batch of Problems, Business Week, August 17, 1992.

, Saturn: May We Help You Kick the Tires? Business Week, August 3, 1992.

Mary-Sophia Smith

updated by Paula Kepos

Cite this article
Pick a style below, and copy the text for your bibliography.

  • MLA
  • Chicago
  • APA

"Saturn Corporation." International Directory of Company Histories. . Encyclopedia.com. 22 Oct. 2017 <http://www.encyclopedia.com>.

"Saturn Corporation." International Directory of Company Histories. . Encyclopedia.com. (October 22, 2017). http://www.encyclopedia.com/books/politics-and-business-magazines/saturn-corporation-0

"Saturn Corporation." International Directory of Company Histories. . Retrieved October 22, 2017 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/books/politics-and-business-magazines/saturn-corporation-0

Saturn Corporation

Saturn Corporation

1420 Stevenson Highway
Troy, Michigan 48007-7025
U.S.A.
(313) 524-5721
Fax: (313) 528-6300

Wholly Owned Subsidiary of General Motors Corporation
Incorporated: 1983
Employees: 6,904 in 1992
Sales: $750 million
SICs: 3711 Motor Vehicles & Car Bodies

Saturn Corporation grew out of a project begun in 1982 within General Motors Corp. (GM) to explore the potential for building a small car of superior quality and value as efficiently as possible, combining the most advanced technology with the newest approaches to management. Saturn realized its product goal by producing a car ranked behind only the Lexus and the Infiniti (imported luxury cars produced by Toyota and Nissan) in the 1992 J.D. Power & Associates customer satisfaction survey. Saturn is regarded as more than simply a successful product, however; the company is seen as an embodiment of GMs vision of modern corporate ideals.

Saturn was the product of an extraordinary effort within GM to create a company from scratch, without any preconceived notions and combining the most advanced techniques and ideas in all areas. From community and employee involvement in decision making, to environmentally responsible plant design, to dealers trained to avoid the high-pressure sales techniques typical of traditional car salesmen, Saturn has sought to embody a 1990s model of corporate enlightenment. Recognized for its innovations in product design and production methodologies, the company has been the recipient of a great deal of positive publicity. While articles praising Saturn are plentiful, however, critics argue that its accomplishments have been achieved slowly and at great expense.

Saturn grew out of a particular climate within the car industry. At the time of the companys conception, the Big Three car makers (General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler) had traditionally built large cars, emphasizing quality and comfort. The industry began to change in the 1950s when foreign car makers (notably Renault and Volkswagen) offered American consumers smaller cars at lower prices. Imports had claimed a 10.1 percent market share by 1959, but they were pushed back to a 4.8 percent share in 1962 after the introduction of the Corvair (GM), the Valiant (Chrysler), and the Falcon (Ford) in 1960.

By the late 1960s, the Big Three began to be challenged by Japanese car manufacturers. The Vega was GMs answer to the challenge. In 1968 GM announced that it would build the Vega from scratch rather than redesign another GM car. The finished product, introduced in 1970, proved disappointing. Vegas were prone to rust and their aluminum engines warped. The Chevette, GMs more successful small car introduced in 1975, was nearing the end of its 10-year product cycle when GM began to work on a replacement, code-named the S car. In 1981 GM determined that the S car could be built much less expensively by Isuzu (GM had bought 34.2 percent of Isuzu in 1971). Its next small car (the Chevrolet Spectrum) was built in Japan. This series of events confirmed in some peoples minds the suspicion that the U.S. couldnt produce small cars competitively. As smaller cars were widely believed to represent the future direction of the industry, the episode called into question the likelihood of the long term survival of the Big Three car manufacturers. To address this concern, Ford initiated the Alpha project and Chrysler began work on Concept 90.

At GM an internal project to build an affordable, high-quality, small car to compete with the imports was approved in May of 1982 by GM Vice-Chairman Howard Kehrl in conjunction with Alex Mair and Robert Eaton, Vice-Presidents in charge of Design and Engineering. On June 15 Alex Mair sat down with engineers Joe Joseph and Tom Ankeny to sketch out the plan. By July the project had been dubbed Saturn, a reference to the Saturn rocket that propelled the American astronauts to the moon during the space race with the Soviets.

The project enjoyed strong sponsorship from the highest ranks of the company. In keeping with the emphasis on consensus throughout Saturn, no one in particular is considered the projects founding father. In the words of then-GM Chief Roger Smith, I dont know who is the father of Saturn around here. I think all of us are promoting it and pushing it. Ive been hot for it but Im not going to tell you that I started it, because that wouldnt be true.

Although the project was to be kept confidential, press leaks began in early 1983. As cooperation with the union was vital to the success of the project, GM had begun behind-the-scenes discussions with Donald Ephlin, the UAW manager covering GM. By October, a joint GM-UAW Study Center was agreed upon.

Motivated in part by claims that the company was turning its back on the U.S. by building cars in Japan, on November 3, 1983, GM announced a new operating unit, the wholly-owned Saturn corporation, with an initial capitalization of $150 million. It would be the first nameplate added to the General Motors ranks since Chevrolet joined GM in 1918. Saturn would incorporate the latest technology available. The operations were to be completely computerized, with robots utilized to reduce direct labor, and flexible manufacturing techniques and just-in-time inventory systems introduced.

The importance of the project is evident in the wording of its announcement. Chairman Roger Smith announced Saturn as the key to GMs long-term competitiveness, survival, and success as a domestic producer.... We expect it to be a learning laboratory, he said, We also expect that what we learn with Saturn will spread throughout GM. He described Saturn as the key to improving every GM plant and product.

Key staff recognized for bringing the project to this point included Alex Mair of the Technical Staffs Group, Bob Eaton of Advanced Product & Manufacturing Engineering, Irv Rybicki of the Design Staff, and UAW leaders Don Ephlin and Joe Molotke. Executives appointed to take the company forward included the former head of the Oldsmobile Division, Joseph Sanchez, as President; the former executive director of Saturn project, Reid Rundell, as Executive Vice-President for Strategic Planning; John Middlebrook as Vice-President for sales, service, and marketing; Tom Manoff as Vice-President for finance; Jay Wetzel as Vice-President for engineering; and Guy Briggs as Vice-President for manufacturing operations. Sanchez died suddenly on January 26 and William E. Hoglund was appointed President on February 4. Hoglund served until Richard G. Skip LeFauve succeeded him on February 3, 1986.

The company was launched. On December 19, 1983, a joint GM-UAW study center was announced. The following February, 99 people (the Group of 99) were designated to identify key founding principals for Saturn and to search the world for the best ideas in all areas. The group consisted of a functional cross-section of people, including plant managers, superintendents, union committee men, production workers, and skilled tradesmen, as well as UAW and GM staff from 41 UAW locals and 55 GM plants.

The group split into seven functional teams to explore stamping; metal fabrication and body work; paint and corrosion; trim and hardware; heating, ventilation, and air conditioning; and powertrain and chassis. In all, the Group of 99 visited 49 GM plants and 60 other companies around the world. They made 170 contacts, traveled 2 million miles, and put in 50,000 hours of effort.

The groups findings were presented in April 1984. The principle keys to success identified included ownership by all employees, the assumption of responsibility by all, equality and trust among employees, the elimination of barriers to doing a good job, giving staff the authority to do their job, and the existence of common goals. Specific recommendations included the use of a conflict resolution process that had been developed by the group and the formation of consensus driven partnerships within work teams as well as between the union and company management.

The search for a plant location began immediately after the company was announced. Two days later, Illinois Governor James Thompson became the first to visit GM advocating a site in his state. By the end of the search process, 24 governors had paid visits to GM and 38 states had expressed interest. Donald Avenson, the Speaker of Iowas House of Representatives, offered to pay half of the first years wages for workers ($140 million) if Saturn settled in Iowa. Spring Hill, Tennessee, was .confirmed as the plant site on July 30, 1985, and in May 1986 construction began.

The plant is a mile long and half a mile wide, totalling 4 million square feet and consisting of four functional buildings: power-train (engine and transmission systems), body systems (frames, exterior panels), vehicle interior systems (interior trim), and vehicle systems (final assembly). The facilities core team, which designed the layout, included employees at all levels. The team considered unique lighting requirements in different areas; placed restrooms and cafeterias conveniently; and designed a sophisticated roadway that separates truck traffic from pedestrians, decentralizes loading docks so materials arrive where they are needed, and ensures that no one walks more than five minutes from parking lot to work.

As controlling labor costs was crucial to competing with the imports on a cost basis, cooperation with the UAW was an important factor. During the 1980s GM had suffered losses and had laid off 170,000 UAW workers. The competitive environment spurred both sides to work together on improving the prospects for American car manufacturing. Al Warren, Vice-President of GMs Industrial Relations Staff, and Donald Ephlin, UAW Vice-President and Director for the General Motors Department, were instrumental in creating a strong bond between Saturn and the UAW.

On July 26, 1985, the UAW executive board approved a unique labor agreement for Saturn. It reduced the number of job classifications, allowed unprecedented flexibility in job content, eliminated work rules, and set pay rates at 80 percent of the base rate at other GM plants with the difference made up in performance incentives. All Saturn workers are salaried and participate in a risk-reward system in which they lose 20 percent of their pay if the company does not reach common goals (e.g. sales goals) but earn proportional bonuses if goals are exceeded. Each team manages its own budget, inventory, and hiring.

Training is an important part of Saturns human resource strategy. Workers spend from 250 to 750 hours in training to become job-ready. On the job, they spend a minimum of five percent of each year in training. Workers are acclimated to Saturns philosophy through core courses on conflict management, consensus decision making, and team dynamics. They also receive specialized technical training on machinery, parts quality, and working with vendors. The training program seeks to promote teamwork, self-direction, initiative, and responsibility. As of mid-1992, Saturns success in the human resource area could be measured by the lowest absentee rates in the industry. Absenteeism at Saturn was 2.5 percent, a far cry from the 14 percent figure at other GM plants.

As other elements of the company were being developed, product development staff were working on the cars. The first demonstration vehicle was completed on September 15, 1984. Although Saturn was a no year project (it had no set launch date), GM chairman Roger Smith was determined to begin production before he retired. He drove the first car off the production line on July 30, 1990, one day before he retired and turned the reigns over to Robert Stempel.

The first truckload of Saturns was sent to dealers in California on October 11, 1990. By November the company garnered several awards, including Popular Sciences 1990 Best of Whats New in Automobiles and an award from the Society of Plastics Engineers for its thermoplastic door panel. In June 1992 the first exports went to Taiwan. Annual production quickly reached 240,000 units and buyers were lined up on waiting lists, but the company was still losing money. By 1993 Saturn expected to raise production to 320,000, allowing the company to turn its first profit; the product line included seven models of sedans, coupes, and wagons.

In developing parts and manufacturing processes, Saturn employed Product Development Teams (PDTs) consisting of manufacturing engineers, finance staff, materials managers, quality engineers, and UAW technicians. The teams decide what materials to stock and evaluate prospective suppliers for quality, price, and efficient organization.

In keeping with the complete job-focus philosophy, a part is manufactured from start to finish in one place. Ergonomics is another important consideration. Equipment is low-tech and people-oriented. It is chosen by its users and frequently adjusts to individuals. Whereas workers must crawl inside the vehicle to work on the cockpit of most cars, Saturn cockpits are assembled in a fixture that can be rotated for the comfort of the individual worker. A skillet system allows workers to ride on a moving platform with the car as it moves down the assembly line. While the basic system was copied from GMs Opel facility in Germany, Saturn widened the platform and turned the cars sideways, saving 40 percent in floor space.

In the engine and transmission area, lost-foam casting was used on a large scale for the first time, providing casting precision, flexibility, material savings, minimal tool wear, and reduced machining. In making trim, plastic colors are mixed at the injection molding machine, reducing change-over time and costs. Other innovative production methods include an environmentally sound waterborne paint process and a method of testing transmissions with air rather than oil.

Marketing has also been a central issue at Saturn. The first marketing customer clinic was held in San Francisco in March of 1985, five years before production began. The car itself is designed to be adaptable to changing consumer preferences. Whereas older cars depend on exterior panels for structural strength, Saturns are structurally based on a strong space frame to which the exterior skin is attached, allowing for quick style changes. Saturns marketing philosophy was also concerned with bringing in plus business (non-GM buyers). Based upon the profile of imported car buyers, the targeted Saturn consumer would be an average of 38 years old, earning an average of $51,000 annually. A large percentage would live on the west coast and 50 percent would be college graduates.

The Saturn Marketing Planning Team incorporated the ideas of 16 dealers representing 25 manufacturers. Led by Donald Hudler, the team studied distribution methods of 30 major U.S. corporations and came up with Saturns Market Area Approach (MAA) announced on May 26, 1987. MAA set up 300 territories to be handled by individual franchised dealers.

Saturn sought the consistency of service lacking in the GM dealer network. In early 1989 dealers were invited to apply for franchises. Saturn dealers are trained in low-pressure sales and are encouraged to pay salaries rather than commissions. The strong demand for the car, coupled with significant dealership control over territory, has enabled Saturn dealers to average twice the unit sales volume of other car dealerships. In addition, the August 3, 1992 Business Week noted that a 17 percent gross margin is built into the no-haggle sticker price (other cars average 12 percent).

An important step in defining Saturns marketing strategy was the selection of an advertising agency. Fifty agencies had applied for consideration by a review panel composed of two Saturn executives, two retailers, and a UAW representative, but the agency chosen was not among them. Thomas Shafer, Director of Marketing Services, felt that it was important to consider West Coast agencies since the small car market was most competitive there. As a result, the Hal Riney & Partners agency was named as Saturns communications partner on May 24, 1988. Riney set about creating a charismatic brand. He felt strongly that model names would detract from the Saturn name and insisted that the cars simply be called Saturns (numbers would distinguish various models). Dealerships would be called saturn of x and colors would be red rather than the more pretentious raspberry red. Saturn advertising was designed to be emotionally driven, with a focus on the human element rather than the product. In February 1989 the first print ad was released even though cars would not be available for more than a year.

In addition to external marketing work, Riney assisted the new company with internal communications. In April 1989 Riney produced Spring, in Spring Hill, a documentary explaining the company to employees, suppliers, and the press. It was later aired as an infomercial. In the film team members explain what the project means to them. In the words of a Riney executive, We wanted to get people rooting for Saturn, the company.

Saturn lost $800,000 in 1990 with calendar year sales of 1,881 units. 1991 calendar year sales were 74,493 units, and 1992 sales reached 196,126 units by December 31, with a substantial number of additional units back ordered. In the 1992 model year Saturn earned a 2.8 percent market share. It is estimated that the company needs to sell 300,000 cars per year to make a profit. Increasing capacity significantly would require further investment in new facilities or the retooling of an existing plant. Building new capacity is unlikely as GM continues to close old plants; retooling, however, also presents problems, as duplication of the innovations in the Spring Hill plant is a formidable task. In addition, there are few existing facilities large enough to accommodate the manufacturing of all necessary components at one site, as Saturn does in Spring Hill.

By mid-1992 Saturn cars had 95 percent domestic content and were ranked as the highest quality American car, with defect ratings rivaling those of top Honda and Nissan vehicles and customer satisfaction ratings second only to Lexus and Infiniti. On the negative side, the company was far from recouping the undisclosed billions that GM had invested in it and was not operating at full capacity. In addition, an average of 35 hours of labor were required per car compared to the stated company goal of 20 hours.

In an effort to transfer experience gained at Saturn throughout GM, the company has moved several Saturn executives to other divisions. GM President and CEO Jack (John F., Jr.) Smith, who succeeded Robert Stempel in 1992 after the latters controversial ouster, talks about Saturnizing all of GM. Yet Donald Ephlin was quoted in the August 17, 1992, issue of Business Week saying, One of the things GM does very poorly is spread improvements across the system.

The future of Saturn remains unclear. Its parent company, General Motors, is undergoing a painful series of layoffs and other cost-cutting measures in response to its well-documented financial woes. The uncertainty about GMs fiscal health has thus clouded speculation about the prospects of its fledgling subsidiary. Saturns product line, however, has enjoyed a generally warm reception, and GM obviously has high hopes for the company.

Further Reading

Smith, Roger B., Remarks by Roger B. Smith, Chairman General Motors Corporation, Saturn Corporation, Troy, MI, January 8, 1985; Higgins, James V., Saturns Revolution: How GM Set the Course to Next Century, Detroit News, January 13, 1985; DeMott, John S., Saturn Makes its Debut at GM, Time, January 21, 1985; Gruley, Bryan, and Ann M. Job, Saturn Sets Off Civil War, Detroit News, January 27, 1985; Whiteside, David, and others, How GMs Saturn Could Run Rings Around Old Style Carmakers, Business Week, January 28, 1985; Saturn Fact Sheet, Saturn

Corporation, Troy, MI; White, Joseph B., and Melinda Grenier Guiles, Rough Launch: GMs Plan for Saturn, To Beat Small Imports, Trails Original Goals, Wall Street Journal, July 7, 1990; Forming the Future: The Marriage of People and Technology at Saturn, Saturn Corporation, Troy, MI, 1990; Saturn Beats Benz, Acura in Survey, Flint Journal, Flint, MI, June 30, 1992; Woodruff, David, Saturn: May We Help You Kick The Tires? Business Week, August 3, 1992; Woodruff, David, Saturn: GM Finally Has a Real Winner, but Success is Bringing a Fresh Batch of Problems, Business Week, August 17, 1992; Building the 1993 Saturn, Saturn Corporation, Troy, MI; Saturn: GMs Final Frontier, Automobile Quarterly, Fall, 1992; Butler, Lacrisha, Sasser Praises Saturn Work, The Tennessean, Nashville, October 7, 1992; White, John R., General Motors Should Build Everything As Well As It Builds Its Saturns, Boston Globe, November 15, 1992; Serafin, Raymond, The Saturn Story: How Saturn Became One of the Most Successful Brands in Marketing History, Advertising Age, November 16, 1992; McGrory, Mary, Saturn Gives U.S. Autos Some Get-Up-And-Go, The Tennessean, Nashville, December 1, 1992; OToole, Jack, and Jim Lewandowski, Important Dates in Saturn History, Saturn Corporation, Troy, MI.

Mary-Sophia Smith

Cite this article
Pick a style below, and copy the text for your bibliography.

  • MLA
  • Chicago
  • APA

"Saturn Corporation." International Directory of Company Histories. . Encyclopedia.com. 22 Oct. 2017 <http://www.encyclopedia.com>.

"Saturn Corporation." International Directory of Company Histories. . Encyclopedia.com. (October 22, 2017). http://www.encyclopedia.com/books/politics-and-business-magazines/saturn-corporation-1

"Saturn Corporation." International Directory of Company Histories. . Retrieved October 22, 2017 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/books/politics-and-business-magazines/saturn-corporation-1